Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 7 de 7
Filtrar
1.
J Clin Psychopharmacol ; 38(4): 336-343, 2018 Aug.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29912786

RESUMEN

PURPOSE/BACKGROUND: Psychostimulant augmentation is considered a potential treatment strategy for individuals with major depressive disorder who do not adequately respond to antidepressant monotherapy. The primary objective of this 12-month open-label extension study was to evaluate the safety and tolerability of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) as augmentation therapy to an antidepressant in adults with major depressive disorder. METHODS/PROCEDURES: Eligible adults who completed 1 of 3 short-term antecedent LDX augmentation of antidepressant monotherapy studies were treated with dose-optimized LDX (20-70 mg) for up to 52 weeks while continuing on the index antidepressant (escitalopram, sertraline, venlafaxine extended-release, or duloxetine) assigned during the antecedent short-term studies. Safety and tolerability assessments included the occurrence of treatment-emergent adverse events and vital sign changes. FINDINGS/RESULTS: All 3 antecedent studies failed to meet the prespecified primary efficacy endpoint, so this open-label study was terminated early. Headache (15.5% [241/1559]), dry mouth (13.6% [212/1559]), insomnia (13.1% [204/1559]), and decreased appetite (12.1% [189/1559]) were the most frequently reported treatment-emergent adverse events. The greatest mean ± SD increases observed for systolic and diastolic blood pressure and for pulse were 2.6 ± 10.85 and 1.7 ± 7.94 mm Hg and 6.9 ± 10.27 bpm, respectively. Monitoring determined that less than 1% of participants experienced potentially clinically important changes in systolic blood pressure (10 [0.6%]), diastolic blood pressure (8 [0.5%]), or pulse (6 [0.4%]). IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS: The overall safety and tolerability of long-term LDX augmentation of antidepressant monotherapy was consistent with the profiles of the short-term antecedent studies, with no evidence of new safety signals.


Asunto(s)
Antidepresivos/uso terapéutico , Estimulantes del Sistema Nervioso Central/uso terapéutico , Trastorno Depresivo Mayor/tratamiento farmacológico , Dimesilato de Lisdexanfetamina/uso terapéutico , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Antidepresivos/administración & dosificación , Antidepresivos/efectos adversos , Estimulantes del Sistema Nervioso Central/administración & dosificación , Estimulantes del Sistema Nervioso Central/efectos adversos , Quimioterapia Combinada , Femenino , Humanos , Dimesilato de Lisdexanfetamina/administración & dosificación , Dimesilato de Lisdexanfetamina/efectos adversos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Adulto Joven
2.
BMC Psychiatry ; 13: 253, 2013 Oct 09.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24106804

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: This study examined the effects of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) on quality of life (QOL) in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and clinically significant executive function deficits (EFD). METHODS: This report highlights QOL findings from a 10-week randomized placebo-controlled trial of LDX (30-70 mg/d) in adults (18-55 years) with ADHD and EFD (Behavior Rating Inventory of EF-Adult, Global Executive Composite [BRIEF-A GEC] ≥65). The primary efficacy measure was the self-reported BRIEF-A; a key secondary measure was self-reported QOL on the Adult ADHD Impact Module (AIM-A). The clinician-completed ADHD Rating Scale version IV (ADHD-RS-IV) with adult prompts and Clinical Global Impressions-Severity (CGI-S) were also employed. The Adult ADHD QoL (AAQoL) was added while the study was in progress. A post hoc analysis examined the subgroup having evaluable results from both AIM-A and AAQoL. RESULTS: Of 161 randomized (placebo, 81; LDX, 80), 159 were included in the safety population. LDX improved AIM-A multi-item domain scores versus placebo; LS mean difference for Performance and Daily Functioning was 21.6 (ES, 0.93, P<.0001); Impact of Symptoms: Daily Interference was 14.9 (ES, 0.62, P<.0001); Impact of Symptoms: Bother/Concern was 13.5 (ES, 0.57, P=.0003); Relationships/Communication was 7.8 (ES, 0.31, P=.0302); Living With ADHD was 9.1 (ES, 0.79, P<.0001); and General Well-Being was 10.8 (ES, 0.70, P<.0001). AAQoL LS mean difference for total score was 21.0; for subscale: Life Productivity was 21.0; Psychological Health was 12.1; Life Outlook was 12.5; and Relationships was 7.3. In a post hoc analysis of participants with both AIM-A and AAQoL scores, AIM-A multi-item subgroup analysis scores numerically improved with LDX, with smaller difference for Impact of Symptoms: Daily Interference. The safety profile of LDX was consistent with amphetamine use in previous studies. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, adults with ADHD/EFD exhibited self-reported improvement on QOL, using the AIM-A and AAQoL scales in line with medium/large ES; these improvements were paralleled by improvements in EF and ADHD symptoms. The safety profile of LDX was similar to previous studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01101022.


Asunto(s)
Trastorno por Déficit de Atención con Hiperactividad/tratamiento farmacológico , Trastorno por Déficit de Atención con Hiperactividad/psicología , Estimulantes del Sistema Nervioso Central/uso terapéutico , Dextroanfetamina/uso terapéutico , Función Ejecutiva/efectos de los fármacos , Calidad de Vida/psicología , Actividades Cotidianas/psicología , Adulto , Atención/efectos de los fármacos , Estimulantes del Sistema Nervioso Central/farmacología , Dextroanfetamina/farmacología , Relación Dosis-Respuesta a Droga , Método Doble Ciego , Femenino , Humanos , Dimesilato de Lisdexanfetamina , Masculino , Pruebas Neuropsicológicas , Autoinforme , Resultado del Tratamiento
3.
J Psychopharmacol ; 31(9): 1190-1203, 2017 09.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28857719

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study evaluated dose-response relationships of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate when used as augmentation for major depressive disorder in individuals exhibiting inadequate responses to antidepressant monotherapy. METHODS: Eligible adults (18-65 years) were assigned to antidepressant monotherapy (escitalopram or venlafaxine extended-release) plus lisdexamfetamine dimesylate-matching placebo during an eight-week single-blind lead-in phase. Participants meeting randomization criteria were randomized (1:1:1:1:1) to eight weeks of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (10, 30, 50, or 70 mg) or placebo while maintaining antidepressant therapy. Dose-responses for changes from augmentation baseline to week 16/early termination for Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale total score (primary efficacy endpoint) and vital signs (systolic and diastolic blood pressure and pulse) were assessed using multiple comparisons procedures with modeling. RESULTS: For Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale total score change, no significant dose-responses were observed for any candidate dose-response curve (all p>0.10). In the dose-response evaluable population, least squares mean (90% confidence interval) treatment differences versus placebo for Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale total score change at week 16 were -1.4 (-3.9, 1.2), 0.1 (-2.5, 2.7), -0.7 (-3.4, 2.0), and -0.9 (-3.5, 1.6) with 10, 30, 50, and 70 mg lisdexamfetamine dimesylate, respectively. For all vital sign parameters, lisdexamfetamine dimesylate exhibited significant dose-responses for all candidate dose-response curves (all p<0.10), with increases observed as lisdexamfetamine dimesylate dose increased; a linear relationship provided the best fit. Mean±standard deviation changes from augmentation baseline for systolic and diastolic blood pressure and pulse at week 16/early termination were -0.7±9.90 and -0.3±7.24 mm Hg and 0.2±10.57 bpm with placebo and were 1.9±9.47 and 0.8±7.40 mm Hg and 3.6±9.74 bpm with lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (all doses combined). The safety and tolerability profile of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate was consistent with previous studies. CONCLUSIONS: Lisdexamfetamine dimesylate augmentation did not provide benefit over placebo in adults with inadequate responses to antidepressant monotherapy based on the assessed efficacy measures.


Asunto(s)
Antidepresivos/uso terapéutico , Trastorno Depresivo Mayor/tratamiento farmacológico , Dimesilato de Lisdexanfetamina/uso terapéutico , Adulto , Presión Sanguínea/efectos de los fármacos , Citalopram/uso terapéutico , Relación Dosis-Respuesta a Droga , Método Doble Ciego , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Clorhidrato de Venlafaxina/uso terapéutico
4.
J Affect Disord ; 206: 151-160, 2016 Dec.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27474961

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The efficacy, safety, and tolerability of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) augmentation of antidepressant monotherapy in adults with major depressive disorder (MDD) from two phase 3 studies are reported. METHODS: Across study 1 (placebo, n=201; LDX, n=201) and study 2 (placebo, n=213; LDX, n=211), most participants (placebo and LDX) in the safety analysis set were female (study 1: 66.2% and 64.2%; study 2: 67.1% and 66.8%); mean±SD ages were 41.8±12.04 with placebo and 42.2±12.32 with LDX in study 1 and 42.6±11.41 with placebo and 42.0±11.63 with LDX in study 2. Participants (18-65 y) had DSM-IV-TR-diagnosed MDD and lead-in baseline Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total scores ≥24. Eight-week antidepressant lead-in phases prospectively assessed antidepressant response. Then, 8 weeks of randomized (1:1), double-blind treatment with dose-optimized LDX (20-70mg) or placebo in participants exhibiting inadequate antidepressant monotherapy responses (augmentation baseline MADRS total scores ≥18 and <50% MADRS total score reductions from lead-in baseline to augmentation baseline) was initiated. The primary endpoint was MADRS total score change from augmentation baseline to week 16. Safety and tolerability measures included the occurrence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). RESULTS: Least squares mean (95% CI) treatment differences (LDX-placebo) for MADRS total score changes from augmentation baseline to week 16 were not statistically significant in study 1 (0.1 [-1.7, 2.0], P=0.883) or study 2 (-0.5 [-2.3, 1.3], P=0.583). The only TEAE reported by >5% of LDX participants at twice the placebo rate in both studies was dry mouth. LIMITATIONS: Limitations include the exclusion of participants with psychiatric comorbidities/active medical disorders, the inability to assess specific MDD symptom domains (eg, anhedonia, cognition) or subtypes, the use of telephone-based depression assessments, and the potential influence of placebo response. CONCLUSION: Contrary to expectations, LDX augmentation was not superior to placebo in reducing depressive symptoms in individuals with MDD exhibiting inadequate responses to antidepressant monotherapy.


Asunto(s)
Antidepresivos/uso terapéutico , Trastorno Depresivo Mayor/tratamiento farmacológico , Inhibidores de Captación de Dopamina/uso terapéutico , Dimesilato de Lisdexanfetamina/uso terapéutico , Adulto , Citalopram/uso terapéutico , Manual Diagnóstico y Estadístico de los Trastornos Mentales , Método Doble Ciego , Quimioterapia Combinada , Clorhidrato de Duloxetina/uso terapéutico , Femenino , Humanos , Análisis de los Mínimos Cuadrados , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Sertralina/uso terapéutico , Resultado del Tratamiento , Clorhidrato de Venlafaxina/uso terapéutico
5.
J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry ; 53(6): 647-657.e1, 2014 Jun.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24839883

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: In this phase 3 extension study, the long-term maintenance of efficacy of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) was evaluated using a randomized-withdrawal study design. METHOD: European and US patients (6-17 years; N = 276) with ADHD were entered into a 26-week open-label trial of LDX treatment. Those who completed the open-label period (n = 157) were randomized 1:1 to their optimized dose of LDX (30, 50, or 70 mg per day) or placebo for a 6-week randomized-withdrawal period (RWP). The primary efficacy measure was the proportion of patients meeting treatment failure criteria (≥50% increase in ADHD Rating Scale IV total score and ≥2-point increase in Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness [CGI-S] score, compared with RWP start point). Safety and tolerability were also evaluated. RESULTS: During the RWP (LDX, n = 78; placebo, n = 79), significantly fewer patients receiving LDX met treatment failure criteria (15.8%) compared with those receiving placebo (67.5%; difference = -51.7%; 95% confidence interval = -65.0, -38.5; p < .001 ). Most treatment failures occurred at or before the week 2 visit after randomization. Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 39.7% and 25.3% of patients receiving LDX and placebo, respectively, during the RWP. CONCLUSIONS: These data demonstrate the maintenance of efficacy of LDX during long-term treatment in children and adolescents with ADHD. The rapid return of symptoms on LDX withdrawal demonstrates the need for continuing treatment. The safety profile of LDX was consistent with that of other stimulants. Clinical trial registration information-Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Randomized Withdrawal, Extension, Safety and Efficacy Study of LDX in Children and Adolescents Aged 6-17; http://clinicaltrials.gov; NCT00784654.


Asunto(s)
Trastorno por Déficit de Atención con Hiperactividad/tratamiento farmacológico , Estimulantes del Sistema Nervioso Central/farmacología , Dextroanfetamina/farmacología , Resultado del Tratamiento , Privación de Tratamiento/normas , Adolescente , Estimulantes del Sistema Nervioso Central/administración & dosificación , Estimulantes del Sistema Nervioso Central/efectos adversos , Niño , Dextroanfetamina/administración & dosificación , Dextroanfetamina/efectos adversos , Método Doble Ciego , Femenino , Humanos , Dimesilato de Lisdexanfetamina , Masculino , Insuficiencia del Tratamiento
6.
J Clin Psychiatry ; 74(7): 694-702, 2013 Jul.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23945447

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Behavioral rating scales that assess impairments in executive function commonly associated with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) may offer advantages over neuropsychological testing. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate for executive function deficits in adults with ADHD and clinically significant executive function impairment using self-reported Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function-Adult version (BRIEF-A) assessments. METHOD: This randomized double-blind study, conducted between May 2010 and November 2010, screened at least 1 participant at 35 of 39 registered US clinical research sites. Adults (aged 18-55 years) with a primary ADHD diagnosis (meeting full DSM-IV-TR criteria) and executive function deficits (assessed by baseline BRIEF-A Global Executive Composite [GEC] T-scores of at least 65) were randomized to treatment with optimized lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (30 mg/d, 50 mg/d, or 70 mg/d; n = 80) or placebo (n = 81) during a 10-week double-blind treatment period. Outcome measures included the BRIEF-A scales (GEC, index, and clinical subscales). RESULTS: At week 10 or at early termination, lisdexamfetamine dimesylate was associated with significantly greater reductions from baseline in mean BRIEF-A GEC T-scores than placebo (effect size, 0.74; P < .0001) and significantly greater reductions from baseline in mean T-scores for both BRIEF-A index scales (Behavioral Regulation Index and Metacognition Index) and all 9 clinical subscales (P ≤ .0056 for all). At week 10 or at early termination, mean T-scores for BRIEF-A indexes and clinical subscales were below levels of clinically significant executive function deficits (ie, < 65) with lisdexamfetamine dimesylate treatment. The mean (SD) GEC T-score was 57.2 (14.11) for the lisdexamfetamine dimesylate group and 68.3 (17.12) for the placebo group. The safety profile of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate was consistent with other long-acting psychostimulants. CONCLUSION: Among adults with ADHD and clinically significant executive function deficits, lisdexamfetamine dimesylate was associated with significant improvements in self-reported executive function ratings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01101022.


Asunto(s)
Trastorno por Déficit de Atención con Hiperactividad/tratamiento farmacológico , Atención/efectos de los fármacos , Dextroanfetamina , Función Ejecutiva/efectos de los fármacos , Adulto , Trastorno por Déficit de Atención con Hiperactividad/diagnóstico , Trastorno por Déficit de Atención con Hiperactividad/psicología , Síntomas Conductuales , Estimulantes del Sistema Nervioso Central/administración & dosificación , Estimulantes del Sistema Nervioso Central/efectos adversos , Dextroanfetamina/administración & dosificación , Dextroanfetamina/efectos adversos , Manual Diagnóstico y Estadístico de los Trastornos Mentales , Relación Dosis-Respuesta a Droga , Monitoreo de Drogas/métodos , Femenino , Humanos , Dimesilato de Lisdexanfetamina , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Pruebas Neuropsicológicas , Escalas de Valoración Psiquiátrica , Autoevaluación (Psicología) , Resultado del Tratamiento
7.
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol ; 4(1): 178-85, 2009 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-19056618

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Lanthanum carbonate (FOSRENOL, Shire Pharmaceuticals) is an effective noncalcium, nonresin phosphate binder for the control of hyperphosphatemia in chronic kidney disease (CKD) stage 5 patients undergoing dialysis. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS AND MEASUREMENTS: A Phase 2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of lanthanum carbonate in CKD stage 3 and 4 patients. Of 281 patients screened, 121 were randomized (2:1) to lanthanum carbonate or placebo (80 versus 41). The modified intent-to-treat population included 90 patients (56 versus 34); 71 (43 versus 28) completed the study. After run-in, when any current phosphate binders were discontinued and dietary counseling reinforced, patients with serum phosphorus >4.6 mg/dl received lanthanum carbonate (titrated up to 3000 mg/d) or matching placebo for 8 wk. RESULTS: At the end of treatment, 25 (44.6%) versus nine (26.5%) patients had serum phosphorus < or =4.6 mg/dl (difference 18.1%, P = 0.12) in the lanthanum carbonate and placebo groups, respectively. Statistically significant differences were observed between groups in change from baseline to end of treatment for serum phosphorus (P = 0.02), intact parathyroid hormone (P = 0.02), and urinary phosphorus excretion (P = 0.04). The safety profile and tolerability of lanthanum carbonate were similar to that of placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Because <1% of phosphorus is in the extracellular fluid, serum measurements may not accurately reflect total body burden in patients with CKD stages 3 and 4. However, lanthanum carbonate is an effective phosphate binder in this patient population, with a safety profile and tolerability similar to that of placebo.


Asunto(s)
Hiperfosfatemia/tratamiento farmacológico , Enfermedades Renales/terapia , Lantano/uso terapéutico , Fósforo/sangre , Diálisis Renal , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Enfermedad Crónica , Método Doble Ciego , Femenino , Humanos , Hiperfosfatemia/sangre , Hiperfosfatemia/etiología , Enfermedades Renales/complicaciones , Lantano/efectos adversos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Hormona Paratiroidea/sangre , Fósforo/orina , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA